Welcome

Welcome to the POZ Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and
others concerned about HIV/AIDS. Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the
conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning: Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive
and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a
username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own
physician.

All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators
of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ community forums.

We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please
provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are
true and correct to their knowledge.

perhaps others should start threads too.... Carolann??? i am sure you may also have any verbose example of cheerfullness to share with us too . Go ahead and post something... i am curious to know what you have to tell us.... Kisses, have a good day

Juan Carlos

Yeah Carolann where are your threads. Have never seen anything written on here but just when you joined back in April of this year. Also have noticed you have a lot of nerve to come on here and start stuff with people that have been on the forums for quite some time.

Personally I don't get involved with posts like this..but that's my choice...and we All have that choice...so if you want to answer the question then go ahead..if not then don't...it's as simple as that...just keep things on track.

Ha! I just had to take the poll to see the "results" -- over 1 in 8 contracting HIV through oral sex suggests an amazing concentration of such incidents...

As for me, I've always assumed I got it "the old-fashioned way" from a buggy load up my ass before we were told to use condoms. The specific source being a very hot Nordic guy in his mid-thirties who gave me syphilis at 17, along with the greatest orgasm and biggest cock I had had up to that time. ...hehehe... I'm spotting just thinking about him.. .... Night sweats and persistent swollen glands set in a few weeks later, after the shot in the glutes and a stern motherly lecture from the then-66 year-old RN at student health services.

Then again, maybe it was one of the blood transfusions I had in Dallas within the year or two before that event, but they don't line up with the apparent "seroconversion illness." Dammit! Then I could have labelled myself an "innocent victim." Dammit! Dammit!

i got mine while getting a tattoo , back in the eightys , what a decade!what a bunch of nit picken bitches !!!!question every thing ! you just might get the right answer !i thought this was a site for open discussion, & things that matters ! (info, how others handle things, & so on)so what if some one starts a topic , it's there choice . if you don't like it go some wheres else !!!

LIFE is not a race to the grave with the intention of arriving safelyin a pretty and well-preserved body, but, rather to skid in broadside,thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming--WOW! WHAT ARIDE!!!

LIFE is not a race to the grave with the intention of arriving safelyin a pretty and well-preserved body, but, rather to skid in broadside,thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming--WOW! WHAT ARIDE!!!

Ha! Amazing that since posting yesterday I've had vivid, full-body recall of my "suspect encounter." The way Lars rimmed me while I deep-throated, it's difficult to see who had the Happy Meal! The texture of his moderate blond fur has felt very real and presentbetween my fingers, on my lips, and grinding into my back. I've gotten myself off three times already this morning, just dwelling in the experience.

I'd do the Eighties again, sure. This time, no sickness and death, no drugs and STDs, no hustling (can I still keep the money?) and no partner violence, though. The music was better, the men hotter, and my butt was perkier

Ha! Amazing that since posting yesterday I've had vivid, full-body recall of my "suspect encounter." The way Lars rimmed me while I deep-throated, it's difficult to see who had the Happy Meal! The texture of his moderate blond fur has felt very real and presentbetween my fingers, on my lips, and grinding into my back. I've gotten myself off three times already this morning, just dwelling in the experience.

For some reason it took me a good minute to figure out how you were rimmed while deep-throating Am I forgetting sex already

Here we go again. Science is not a poll or questionnaire. Science is rigorous testing and trial. Asking 200 or 2000 people to go home and have no oral sex and then come back for hiv testing in a year is not science, it is worse than pure fiction. It is no different and no more reliable than the telephone polls or newspapers polls on other subjects. It would only be science if participants were in a controlled environment that recorded all sexual activity. Thats science,everything else is just conjecture,consensus,and speculation. I dont mind people saying there is a general consensus among hivers that you cant get hiv from performing oral sex and swallowing cum. I do mind people saying it is based on science. Its just not true.

I dont mind people saying there is a general consensus among hivers that you cant get hiv from performing oral sex and swallowing cum. I do mind people saying it is based on science. Its just not true.

But Jack, dear, it is based on science - including the studies you've just discredited. It's also based on what we know about the science of transmission on the cellular level.

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

I haven't discredited any studies. I just said they aren't science. They are results from questionaires. That isnt science. There are no controls. To have a truly scientific study on the matter you would have to monitor people 24/7. I dont believe that is being done. I guess I get sorta of pissed cause I know how I got this virus,yet I have people telling me it is scientifically impossible based on how the virus acts in a test tube or from group studies via questionaires with no controls.It reminds me of my Drs. when they told me my hump was not from the drugs, or the reason my VL wasnt going up was because I wasnt following the regimen. Bullshit. Studies may show that HIV is not transmitted orally but those studies are not scientific in any form or manner until you can prove participants are or arent using safe sex, and what kind of sex they are having. You just dont take a persons word for it and call it science.

Jack - science takes many forms, including epidemiological study (the questionaire type of methods you are speaking of) as well as laboratory research. Each are considered to be scientific and are used to answer different aspects of questions and each has its own set of limitations.

You are correct in the sense that sometimes what occurs in a lab does not translate to what occurs in the body but to call one science and other not is not correct.

JP (who is a biological scientist and works extensively with epidemiology on a daily basis)

PS - many epidemiological studies are well controlled and/or the analysis of the data also well controlled in order to make the appropriate conclusions. It may not always be obvious until you look deeper into the studies.

Studies may show that HIV is not transmitted orally but those studies are not scientific in any form or manner until you can prove participants are or arent using safe sex, and what kind of sex they are having. You just dont take a persons word for it and call it science.

WHAT?!!!! You're contradicting yourself within this post and in the context of your other posts.

I was in a monogamous relationship for 5 years... after 4 hiv test...in a time period of two years with each of us testing neg.... why play safe? Well I'll tell you why... my ex with the big dick was dipping all over town... while I was monogamous... he left me with a lifelong gift... I was bitter for a long time... now he's with full blown aids... broke... living in NYC... asking for money... from family, friends and even myself... While I'm living an extremely comfortable existence... thru inheritance and finally I think I've met the man of my dreams... I'll see how this goes... still counting coins but, what is money without someone you love to share with... the one I'm seeing is a keeper... wish me luck!

I'm not talking about what happens in test tubes. I'm talking about the fact that hiv can only latch onto and infect a few very specific cell types and these cell types are rather scare in the oral cavity. They may not be totally absent, but hiv has little chance of bumping into these few cells while intact and able to infect. Hiv is very fragile and there are over a dozen different proteins and enzymes present in saliva that render hiv unable to infect.

The studies you reference didn't involve one-off questionnaires given to just any-old-body. The participants were carefully screened and followed for as many as ten years in some instances. You make it sound like a questionnaire taken on some street-corner or local charity table in some mall.

You may well have been the rare unlucky person who blew someone with an off-the-chart viral load while you had a throat/tonsil infection. But outside that sort of scenario, it just isn't likely to happen.

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

Whatever. I have HIV. I know how I got it. I still dont think you can call a test scientific unless you know for sure that participants arent practicing safe sex. I remember a trial for an HIV vaccine several years ago in Thailand,where the results were judged rubbish because of controls similar to these blow job studies I have read about here. The problem is you dont know what people are doing in private. There is no way to prove they are having oral sex or if they are and using condoms unless you are watching them. I dont understand what screening or staying in touch has to with what I am talking about. I also wonder about the ethics of promoting a trial that puts negs with positives and tells them to fuck and suck away with no protection. I guess the ends justifies the means,not because they got the results they wanted, but because in some quarters this is apparently defined as science.I guess the only trial or study I would consider science,given my experience and resulting condition, is a trial where you had negs performing oral on positives and some one would have to verify it. Then you would also have to worry about these same neg people having unprotected sex with people outside of the study and contacting hiv. There are so many ways to corrupt the results it isnt even worth talking about without someone spending every waking hour watching the participants. I guess you could round everyone up once a week in a big room and have everyone suck away to make sure they are doing it and not using protection.

Amazingly a topic discussed at United Churches of Christ throughout the nation on June 7, 2007. Naw, naw, we don't think milker is God nor do we believe that his posts are the infallible Word of God. Rather, read the rest of the story:

Focus Scripture Luke 7:36-8:3

One of the Pharisees asked Jesus to eat with him, and he went into the Pharisee's house and took his place at the table. And a woman in the city, who was a sinner, having learned that he was eating in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster jar of ointment. She stood behind him at his feet, weeping, and began to bathe his feet with her tears and to dry them with her hair. Then she continued kissing his feet and anointing them with the ointment.

Now when the Pharisee who had invited him saw it, he said to himself, "If this man were a prophet, he would have known who and what kind of woman this is who is touching him—that she is a sinner."

Jesus spoke up and said to him, "Simon, I have something to say to you." "Teacher," he replied, "speak." "A certain creditor had two debtors; one owed five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. When they could not pay, he cancelled the debts for both of them. Now which of them will love him more?" Simon answered, "I suppose the one for whom he cancelled the greater debt." And Jesus said to him, "You have judged rightly."

Then turning towards the woman, he said to Simon, "Do you see this woman? I entered your house; you gave me no water for my feet, but she has bathed my feet with her tears and dried them with her hair. You gave me no kiss, but from the time I came in she has not stopped kissing my feet. You did not anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed my feet with ointment. Therefore, I tell you, her sins, which were many, have been forgiven; hence she has shown great love. But the one to whom little is forgiven, loves little." Then he said to her, "Your sins are forgiven." But those who were at the table with him began to say among themselves, "Who is this who even forgives sins?" And he said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."

Soon afterwards he went on through cities and villages, proclaiming and bringing the good news of the kingdom of God. The twelve were with him, as well as some women who had been cured of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary, called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out, and Joanna, the wife of Herod's steward Chuza, and Susanna, and many others, who provided for them out of their resources.

Focus Meditationby Kate Huey

It's very common these days, not just in church but in society in general, to hear the phrase, "We're all sinners." Usually it's in connection with the struggle of the churches to deal with accepting or not accepting gay folks, but it could also apply to, say, divorced and remarried people (which used to be much more scandalous than it is now) or people who have been in prison (their sentence is never really over in the minds of some folks) or people who are living with HIV/AIDS (we tend to judge people for how they got sick). In any case, we still think there is a double standard of "sinnerhood," if you will: there are sinners, and then there are sinners.

In other words, in this story, the woman who washes Jesus' feet out of extravagant gratitude and love is a notorious sinner in the town. She's really a "sinner with a capital S." Simon the religious leader may be a sinner because "we're all sinners," but that's different. His status as a sinner doesn't make him unworthy (in his own eyes or presumably, in the eyes of Jesus) to have Jesus as a guest, along with certain other preferred guests, and it certainly doesn't put him above judging the intruder and even judging Jesus himself. He finds a judgment on Jesus in the scene before him. He's not moved or touched by the woman's love and tenderness, and he's not impressed by Jesus' lack of discernment and, if you will, taste. In fact, he's so busy judging that he forgets to take care of the basics of hospitality himself, so it's ironic that the man with all the resources at his command (we can almost picture the setting in his comfortable home) doesn't use them for the sake of his guest, and then he turns a blind eye to the grace of a lowly woman entering uninvited into his little party. If Jesus used the term "debts" to speak of the relief of being forgiven (and how many of us wouldn't love to be forgiven all our debts, financial and otherwise?), it's as if this man Simon hasn't gone online lately to check his credit card balance and doesn't know just how deep he's in trouble.

Of course, the real twist can be for us, reading the text today. We love the intruder woman and want to identify with her, right? Sometimes it's hard to find the character we connect with most closely in a story from the Bible. In the prodigal son story, for example, when we take the side of the older brother who's been working hard and doing the right thing all along and has a right to feel outrage at a party being thrown for his good-for-nothing brother, we forget that we probably resemble the prodigal son much more than the righteous older brother. But in this story and in the church and in our society, we may find ourselves behaving more like the Pharisee than the open-hearted woman returning in gratitude, even though we find ourselves judging him in our own hearts. Ironically, it's the woman in this story who has both power and freedom: she does what she wants to do, from the bottom of her heart, and she is free of worry about what people think or the propriety of her actions. Rebecca J. Kruger Gaudino sees in the woman's humility an awareness of God's presence that we might all strive to achieve: "From this foundational principle that reorients our lives from self to divine Presence, all the other principles flow: how we bear ourselves, how we speak, how we live in community, and to what degree we may reveal ourselves to others. In all things, we live out of the humility that comes in recognizing God's presence among us" (New Proclamation Year C 2007).

Simon, unfortunately, wasn't in tune with God's presence in the midst of his party, in the grace experienced by this woman forgiven, the wisdom and tender love of Jesus, who understood and was deeply touched by her gratitude, and his own need for God's mercy and understanding, which were available to him in the person of Jesus, right there before his eyes. Instead, his eyes were clouded by judgment and misjudgment,and he missed a golden opportunity for grace. So where do we stand, in this story? And with whom do we stand? Are we missing something as we work hard to draw lines and pass judgment? What about our hospitality? Are there lines drawn there, or is everyone really, truly welcome, even if they upset the schedule and didn't make it onto the guest list? Are we so busy with the tasks of hospitality (making coffee, setting things up) that we forget the heart of hospitality, and neglect to look at each person, where they are, recognize them as a child of God (even if they are a "fellow sinner") and extend a warm and heartfelt welcome to them?

This passage is also a powerful text about giving, in more than one way. The concluding verses, which really open the next section of the Gospel, have a short but illustrative description of the missionary travels of Jesus and "the twelve," along with "some women," and including "many others, who provided for them out of their resources." Faithful support of mission is evident in the earliest accounts of the church. However, the extravagance of the grateful woman, the known "sinner," is just as much an example to us as the quietly faithful followers who supported Jesus' ministry.

When have you given extravagantly, without thought of cost or "prudence," or of what others might think? How might we see generosity – including our giving to God's mission through the church – as abundantly, extravagantly, freely exercised, springing irresistibly from a profound inner need to express what we feel in response to God’s mercy and goodness in our lives? Do you have that kind of gratitude and awareness of God's movement in your life? Why or why not? How is the church called to nurture this sense, this response, to all that God is doing in our individual and collective lives?

I'd do the Eighties again, sure. This time, no sickness and death, no drugs and STDs, no hustling (can I still keep the money?) and no partner violence, though. The music was better, the men hotter, and my butt was perkier

Aside from the fact that I've never had much of an ass, I'll agree with this in its entirety.

And, as I've stated many many many many times before, I was most probably infected before condoms were proposed, having begun my sexual career at the age of 17 in 1977. I bottomed throughout my teens and fucked like a cage of Bonobo monkies after that. By 1992 I'd stopped counting my losses at 60 dead.

Occasionally I get into the torturous mindfuck of which one infected me/which one did I infect? This is a dead-end road that leads nowhere and is generally the result of one too many cocktails and/or the use of cannabis.

Brent(Who thinks this thread went marvelously evil for a spell)

Logged

Blessed with brains, talent and gorgeous tits.

The revolutionary smart set reads The Spin Cycle at least once every day.